June 16, 2011

Let the Candidates Debate

The recent CNN debate among the current candidates for the Republican nomination for president illustrated once more that political debates have become more about the moderators and reporters, and also about endless social media and technical gimmicks, than about the candidates themselves.

Before I criticize, let me offer a defense of the moderator of the CNN debate, John King. He suffered some pretty bad press reviews for his repeated tries at interrupting the candidates in order to keep them within the 30 seconds in which they each were allowed to speak.

King was a victim of the way the debate was set up. He was merely trying to keep a really bad format on track.

The recent CNN debate among the current candidates for the Republican nomination for president illustrated once more that political debates have become more about the moderators and reporters, and also about endless social media and technical gimmicks, than about the candidates themselves.

Before I criticize, let me offer a defense of the moderator of the CNN debate, John King. He suffered some pretty bad press reviews for his repeated tries at interrupting the candidates in order to keep them within the 30 seconds in which they each were allowed to speak.

King was a victim of the way the debate was set up. He was merely trying to keep a really bad format on track.

These Republican candidates are potential challengers to President Barack Obama. With two hours available to debate, why not let each candidate answer the same question? Why not give them a reasonable time to answer?

Here is the real answer to that question: The debate was all about the media, not the candidates.

Think of the assorted media technical devices and the personalities that had to be made relevant in order to meet the specifications of the modern-day “techno-social” debate platform. And think of all the media that were involved as players in this debate.

The debate – and I use the term loosely – included questions from remote locations, where “town hall meetings” had been assembled. Then there were the questions from CNN’s media partners, both the major newspaper in the debate’s host state, New Hampshire, and also the leading television station. And don’t forget questions from the moderator and his Facebook friends. All that media noise can consume two hours with not a minute left over.

The format was great for those asking questions. They were allowed to drone on and on. But the candidates were given very little time to respond. My guess is that questioners got more airtime than the candidates. Then there was what is termed “clash” in debate lingo. Face-to-face confrontation.

But wait – there wasn’t any in this debate. The closest we came to seeing real clash was when the local TV anchor had her 15 minutes of fame as she tossed self-styled “tough” questions at the candidates. I can imagine that she worked for days thinking up her “gotcha” questions. After all, she had to appear as if she belonged in the big leagues.

One of the prominent storylines that emerged from the New Hampshire debate was that the candidates refrained from attacking one another.

Little wonder. When you only have 30 seconds and you’re therefore pushed for airtime, that leaves you few opportunities to aggressively go after your fellow candidates – at least not without coming across as being vicious and petty.

It would have been more appropriate to let the candidates ask questions of one another. But that, of course, would have meant less time for answering vital questions, such as whether a candidate prefers “American Idol” or “Dancing With the Stars”

To that urgent question, Newt Gingrich replied immediately “American Idol.” Sorry, Newt, but knowing you, I doubt you could have named the winner of that show this year if your life depended on it. More importantly, neither Gingrich nor any of the other candidates should have been subjected to such nonsense.

Nevertheless, answers to these trivial questions could have important implications. Tim Pawlenty was forced to choose between Coke and Pepsi. He said, “Coke.” I guess that answer reduced substantially any support he might otherwise have enjoyed from Pepsi or its huge employee base in Texas.

Of course, if you had asked a journalist the same question, the response would have been, “As a journalist, I am not allowed to choose sides among types of cell phones or colas.”

Then there was what I termed “the big freeze” in this contest. From the number of questions tossed to Herman Cain and Ron Paul, you would have thought that they were the obvious frontrunners in the race. Meanwhile, the true frontrunner – at least for now – is Mitt Romney. He spent much of the debate just looking presidential. And former Speaker Gingrich, who had to fight to even participate in the contest, spent most of his time looking frustrated.

Hey, I’m not a CNN basher. For one thing, they are headquartered in Atlanta, where I live. But I hope all of the networks and news associations learn a big lesson from this debate. It’s shouldn’t be about the media. It should be about the candidates.

COPYRIGHT 2011 CREATORS.COM

Who We Are

The Patriot Post is a highly acclaimed weekday digest of news analysis, policy and opinion written from the heartland — as opposed to the MSM’s ubiquitous Beltway echo chambers — for grassroots leaders nationwide. More

What We Offer

On the Web

We provide solid conservative perspective on the most important issues, including analysis, opinion columns, headline summaries, memes, cartoons and much more.

Via Email

Choose our full-length Digest or our quick-reading Snapshot for a summary of important news. We also offer Cartoons & Memes on Monday and Alexander’s column on Wednesday.

Our Mission

The Patriot Post is steadfast in our mission to extend the endowment of Liberty to the next generation by advocating for individual rights and responsibilities, supporting the restoration of constitutional limits on government and the judiciary, and promoting free enterprise, national defense and traditional American values. We are a rock-solid conservative touchstone for the expanding ranks of grassroots Americans Patriots from all walks of life. Our mission and operation budgets are not financed by any political or special interest groups, and to protect our editorial integrity, we accept no advertising. We are sustained solely by you. Please support The Patriot Fund today!


The Patriot Post and Patriot Foundation Trust, in keeping with our Military Mission of Service to our uniformed service members and veterans, are proud to support and promote the National Medal of Honor Heritage Center, the Congressional Medal of Honor Society, both the Honoring the Sacrifice and Warrior Freedom Service Dogs aiding wounded veterans, the National Veterans Entrepreneurship Program, the Folds of Honor outreach, and Officer Christian Fellowship, the Air University Foundation, and Naval War College Foundation, and the Naval Aviation Museum Foundation. "Greater love has no one than this, to lay down one's life for his friends." (John 15:13)

★ PUBLIUS ★

“Our cause is noble; it is the cause of mankind!” —George Washington

Please join us in prayer for our nation — that righteous leaders would rise and prevail and we would be united as Americans. Pray also for the protection of our Military Patriots, Veterans, First Responders, and their families. Please lift up your Patriot team and our mission to support and defend our Republic's Founding Principle of Liberty, that the fires of freedom would be ignited in the hearts and minds of our countrymen.

The Patriot Post is protected speech, as enumerated in the First Amendment and enforced by the Second Amendment of the Constitution of the United States of America, in accordance with the endowed and unalienable Rights of All Mankind.

Copyright © 2024 The Patriot Post. All Rights Reserved.

The Patriot Post does not support Internet Explorer. We recommend installing the latest version of Microsoft Edge, Mozilla Firefox, or Google Chrome.